Jump to content

UK Politics: Last Chrismas we partied so hard, now it was leaked before a repeat.


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Why do right wing loons get so hot under the collar about the most trivial things? Blue passports, crowns on pint glasses, this nonsense etc. 

Blue passports now made abroad. Crowns we never had to get rid of so long as the glasses had the CE mark.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Blue passports now made abroad. Crowns we never had to get rid of so long as the glasses had the CE mark.

 

Blue passports also didn't have to be got rid of.

Nor the BBC playing GStQ.

 

As for why the nationalists get their knickers twisted about there things - it's because they're nationalists, and like the regalia of nationalism. They're also desperate to spin a win out of Brexit, and these things are the closest they can get to that - whilst they're mostly too dumb to realise that the change had nothing to do with joining the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Why do right wing loons get so hot under the collar about the most trivial things? Blue passports, crowns on pint glasses, this nonsense etc. 

Because trivial things are the only victories they’re actually getting from Brexit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Blue passports now made abroad. Crowns we never had to get rid of so long as the glasses had the CE mark.

 

If UK glass makers want to export any pint glasses they will need to use the CE mark, even outside of the EU unless they can convince the importing country to accept the crown mark in place of the CE mark. Though I guess at least EU pint glass makers will possibly not bother supplying the UK any longer because most won't be arsed running special lines of classes with the crown mark. So I guess it's a Brexit benefit of sorts as it means UK glass makers only need to compete internally to supply the UK pint glass market. Might be worth a couple of jobs in the glass-making industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it looks like the Tories are going into full moronic 'let it rip!' mode, or are at least floating the idea. Self-isolation cut to five days, no more free LFTs, 'it's not pandemic it's endemic', live with it! Enjoy your COVID everybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, mormont said:

So it looks like the Tories are going into full moronic 'let it rip!' mode, or are at least floating the idea. Self-isolation cut to five days, no more free LFTs, 'it's not pandemic it's endemic', live with it! Enjoy your COVID everybody.

End to free tests has been denied, but will probably be u turned like everything else.

Cutting isolation times might be a good idea considering the number of staff shortages happening.

We all have to remember that we are in a very different position to last year. We now have a very highly vaccinated and immune population. Omicron is spreading incredibly rapidly despite all the measures that have been implemented and so many people being vaccinated. It’s also not really translating into deaths and severe disease. 
 

Its really hard to tie ‘let it rip’ as an insult with a country that has the second highest booster programme in the world. 
 

Would interested to know what your plan would have been?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Cutting isolation times might be a good idea considering the number of staff shortages happening.

Cutting isolation times increases, rather than decreases, staff shortages because it is likely to increase the number of cases.

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Would interested to know what your plan would have been?

To operate on the precautionary principle. To take measures according to medical advice, not internal party politics. To be prepared to commit to a course of action for more than ten minutes. To try to preserve lives and be prepared to do the right thing, not the expedient thing.

Of course these notions mean that I would never, in the modern Conservative party, be let near any decision-making power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, mormont said:

Cutting isolation times increases, rather than decreases, staff shortages because it is likely to increase the number of cases.

Does it? Evidence?
 

 

56 minutes ago, mormont said:

To operate on the precautionary principle. To take measures according to medical advice, not internal party politics. To be prepared to commit to a course of action for more than ten minutes. To try to preserve lives and be prepared to do the right thing, not the expedient thing.

Of course these notions mean that I would never, in the modern Conservative party, be let near any decision-making power.

Thats not what I asked. You've just rambled off some vague platitudes, some of which are kinda incorrect. I'd like to know what your plan is now. What would you be doing that we aren't doing?
 

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly? I'd be maintaining free testing for as long as it is needed. Increasing support for working from home in the form of grants for employers who offer it (and integrating that with an environmental plan to repurpose office accommodation). Passing legislation to explicitly allow employers to impose vaccine mandates on staff. Improving ventilation standards in public buildings and public transport, including grants for public transport providers to order environmentally-friendly new vehicles. Increasing international co-operation on pandemic measures including a massive effort to supply vaccines to poorer countries. Looking at economic reforms that can fund these measures for as long as they are needed (with international support, if possible).

And all the stuff I already said. Adopt the precautionary principle, follow expert medical advice on isolation and other issues, and so on. That you read these as platitudes explains some of your attitude to the pandemic, but they are specific, practical policy positions.

In other words I would be approaching the pandemic as probably the most serious challenge the UK has faced in my lifetime instead of as an obstacle or opportunity to my personal political ambitions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here.  The governments have utterly failed to handle covid in any effective way, with policy, regulations, assistance, and is throwing up its hands and quitting, just like in the UK.  "Too hard for us, and you are being too mean to think we should be providing leadership, intelligence and organization."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Honestly? I'd be maintaining free testing for as long as it is needed.

When is that? What is your end point? When do we need to stop mass testing everyone?

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Increasing support for working from home in the form of grants for employers who offer it (and integrating that with an environmental plan to repurpose office accommodation).

For how long? What about the expense of this? Is it necessary? What about all the businesses such as hospitality affected by people working from home? When does this end? How many people does this genuinely effect? What about people who can't work from home

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Passing legislation to explicitly allow employers to impose vaccine mandates on staff.

What is your reasoning for allowing vaccine mandates in a world where vaccines are not sufficient to prevent infection? Why allow a divisive and damaging policy that will have little to no effect on spread?

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Improving ventilation standards in public buildings and public transport, including grants for public transport providers to order environmentally-friendly new vehicles

This one I agree with as it applies to a number of airborne disease going forward. Not sure why you have thrown in an environmental thing in there, but oh well. 

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Increasing international co-operation on pandemic measures including a massive effort to supply vaccines to poorer countries.

Sure, more can be done, but its not like the UK hasn't shared any vaccines, or isn't part of Covax. But then how much is this going to help reduce the spread? 
 

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Looking at economic reforms that can fund these measures for as long as they are needed (with international support, if possible).


So more taxes. As well as more taxes to pay for everything else. Ok.

1 hour ago, mormont said:

And all the stuff I already said. Adopt the precautionary principle, follow expert medical advice on isolation and other issues, and so on. That you read these as platitudes explains some of your attitude to the pandemic, but they are specific, practical policy positions.

Well firstly, the government has often followed medical advice, that medical advice has also often proved to be wrong. Its also not as 'medical advice' is some monolith that agree on everything or that it doesn’t need to be balanced against the many other factors at play. The most irritating part of your attitude is that you and other act like the government is 'letting it rip' (your words) in a world where we've been in numerous lockdowns, we are currently following Plan B which has introduced a number of measures that have probably not done anything worthwhile.

None of the things you've mentioned above will have any real immediate effect and I think you know that. They sound great, but when you throw out arguments at the government for not doing enough, but have no real short term ideas on how you could do better it doesn't look good.

1 hour ago, mormont said:

In other words I would be approaching the pandemic as probably the most serious challenge the UK has faced in my lifetime instead of as an obstacle or opportunity to my personal political ambitions.

It was a serious challenge. We've now vaccinated almost the entire country and boosted almost the vulnerable . We've done a lot. The virus almost certainly will become endemic, and will be just one more of the many respiratory viruses in circulation that we've had to live with.  We haven't 'let it rip' at all and suggesting we have is pure ignorance. 


 

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seriously don't understand what people's problems with mass testing is. The argument is that if you test positive but are not symptomatic, Omicron is unserious enough that you should just go on working? Okay, but even though it's less serious, it's still caused hospitals to start breaking from the people that are getting hospitalised when you're testing.  Stopping tests, sending people to work, will mean that the official numbers get lower but very very likely the hospitalisation rate will be even higher, because people won't even know they have it till they have to take themselves to the emergency room. Yeah, a great way to solve the problem, I'm sure. Until we know that Omicron, or whatever next variant comes along, isn't gonna break our hospitals, we've got to protect them. 

 

 

I've had this argument recently even with people who've been vaccinated and sat through all the lockdowns etc, and they cannot seem to wrap their brains around that there's no short term fix for this, the answer is to build a healthcare system that can handle surges. It's not just the UK, pretty much every Western country has been running their system with no flex in it, and this is the result. The problem simply won't go away till that's fixed, no matter how we stick our fingers in our ears and go 'I'm not testing! I'm not testing!'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mormont said:

Honestly? I'd be maintaining free testing for as long as it is needed. Increasing support for working from home in the form of grants for employers who offer it (and integrating that with an environmental plan to repurpose office accommodation). Passing legislation to explicitly allow employers to impose vaccine mandates on staff. Improving ventilation standards in public buildings and public transport, including grants for public transport providers to order environmentally-friendly new vehicles. Increasing international co-operation on pandemic measures including a massive effort to supply vaccines to poorer countries. Looking at economic reforms that can fund these measures for as long as they are needed (with international support, if possible).

And all the stuff I already said. Adopt the precautionary principle, follow expert medical advice on isolation and other issues, and so on. That you read these as platitudes explains some of your attitude to the pandemic, but they are specific, practical policy positions.

In other words I would be approaching the pandemic as probably the most serious challenge the UK has faced in my lifetime instead of as an obstacle or opportunity to my personal political ambitions.

Such a well-put answer that HoI couldn't even pull his usual move of a confused or laughing emoji. Can't help but think how different things would be if the UK had someone with your mindset in charge, instead of the current clown. We sadly live in "interesting" times indeed! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

When is that? What is your end point? When do we need to stop mass testing everyone?

When medical advice suggests that it is no longer necessary, in line with the precautionary principle.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

For how long? What about the expense of this? Is it necessary?

What about the ongoing expense of trying in vain to get back to 'normal' and having to change course? What about the enormous savings? Why would I be suggesting it if I didn't consider it necessary?

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

What about all the businesses such as hospitality affected by people working from home?

They'll have to adjust. Some will close. But it's never been a sensible argument to say that we must continue to do an unnecessary thing to support businesses that exist to fill a niche that no longer exists or needs to exist.

Indeed, it's an epic failure of imagination to suggest that this is an argument against working from home as the future model of much work. A failure of imagination that is dominating the UK government's thinking at the moment. The insistence that we can and should 'get back to normal' is just a point blank refusal to acknowledge that the way things were may not be something we can or should go back to.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

When does this end? How many people does this genuinely effect? What about people who can't work from home

They won't.

I employ a wide range of staff and some can and some can't work from home. I've been managing that mixed workforce for two years now. It's doable. It's better. It offers challenges but if I can overcome them, any organisation can.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

What is your reasoning for allowing vaccine mandates in a world where vaccines are not sufficient to prevent infection?

Go read some of your own posts, I would suggest, because ever since vaccines became available you've been an evangelist for how they protect people even if they become infected. In fact you've been arguing this exact point in the current COVID thread. And long term, vaccination rates in the high nineties are the only viable way out of this.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

This one I agree with as it applies to a number of airborne disease going forward. Not sure why you have thrown in an environmental thing in there, but oh well. 

That would be because the environment is already as serious a public policy challenge as the pandemic (and the two are intimately linked), and the current system is failing that challenge just as spectacularly as it is failing the pandemic challenge.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Well firstly, the government has often followed medical advice, that medical advice has also often proved to be wrong.

Sure. But it's been predicated on evidence and based on caution and saving lives, not who in the cabinet wants to curry favour with their party. And the government's failure to follow medical advice has also often been wrong, with dire results.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

None of the things you've mentioned above will have any real immediate effect and I think you know that.

Blethers. Neither you nor I know any such thing.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

It was a serious challenge.

That past tense is the one you've been employing for about two years now.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

We haven't 'let it rip' at all and suggesting we have is pure ignorance.

You may want to read the first post I made: it suggests not that the government has been letting it rip, but that it is about to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, mormont said:

That past tense is the one you've been employing for about two years now.

Let's hope anyone putting that serious challenge in the past doesn't have an emergency appendicitis attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...